Such was the prevailing sentiment among lobbyists, legislators and a concerned public gathered at the state Capitol for Sportsmen’s Day at the Legislature on Thursday, as voiced by Jen Boulton in regard to the latest offering from Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling) to the Colorado General Assembly.

Until then, the plot thickens.

Sonnenberg’s House Bill 1322 is scheduled for discussion Monday afternoon by the House Education Committee. Let’s just hope its members are smart enough to flunk it.

The summary of this far-reaching and ill-conceived bill is a demand that the federal government sell all public land considered suitable for agriculture in Colorado by the end of 2014. Agriculture in this instance is quite broad in scope, including grazing or logging, which essentially encompasses all U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management properties, potentially even U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuge lands.

It further requires the federal government to remit 5 percent of the net proceeds to a state trust fund. Half the interest and proceeds would go to an education fund, the other half to water storage projects.

And the unstated consequence of the bill is that 100 percent of public hunting, fishing and recreational access on 23 million acres of federal lands in Colorado would be eliminated.

Constitutionality problems of making such demands of the federal government aside, this loopy legislation attempt provokes more questions than it suggests solutions. Among them: Why? And as a follow-up: Is this really the type of leadership sportsmen can rely upon to represent their interests?

The stock answer as to why is a belief that the federal government does a poor job of managing its public lands. And Sonnenberg, chairman of the House Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Resources Committee, has a long history as an adversary of public land ownership and an advocate of private property rights.

By suggesting such legislation, Sonnenberg and Senate co-sponsors Sen. Scott Renfroe (R-Greeley) and Sen. Mark Scheffel (R-Parker) become players in a small Western movement promoting privatized hunting under the premise of benefiting the resource. Legislators from a few other Western states have submitted similar bills based upon a template proposed in Utah by Republican Rep. Ken Ivory. The controversial Utah-based conservation group Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, founded by Don Peay, also has encouraged such a model.

“As we understand it, five states are running similar legislation,” said Lisa Dale, legislative program manager for Colorado Parks and Wildlife. “I haven’t heard any support for this bill. I can’t imagine it.”

While the bill itself may not stand much chance, its origin merits some scrutiny. Sonnenberg is also the representative responsible for HB 1317, which defines the makeup of the newly merged Parks and Wildlife Commission, and HB 1322 could certainly be perceived as an indicator of his stance on sportsmen’s issues.

A basic tenet of the North American Model of Wildlife Management is that wildlife belongs to all of us, a public resource that’s not merely the property of a landowner. Public lands provide public access to that resource.

Attempting to turn those public lands to private essentially closes the gate on that access, establishing a model wherein wildlife becomes available only to the highest bidder.

And that’s to say nothing of the nonconsumptive portion of the Parks and Wildlife system presently being revamped here in Colorado.

Outside of existing state and national parks, recreational outdoorsmen, bird watchers and nonhunting or fishing tourists who appreciate wildlife merely for its intrinsic value would also be shut out and left with few places left to go.

Again, the odds aren’t good for such a proposal to gain any traction within the General Assembly. But dots remain to be connected, specifically as it pertains to the makeup of the future Parks and Wildlife Commission.

Sonnenberg already has chosen to ignore recommendations by the sitting Parks and Wildlife Commission and the Department of Natural Resources on how the new commission should be comprised. His own idea, drafted in HB 1317 and approved by the committee he chairs, includes an equal number of landowner representatives as representatives of sportsmen, who pay the majority of the bills. And his latest bill, HB 1322, makes a statement about his perspective on landownership that shouldn’t be ignored.

As HB 1317 co-sponsor Sen. Gail Schwartz (D-Snowmass Village) noted last week, the ultimate objective for both the new Parks and Wildlife Commission and the department it will oversee is balance. That means representing the interests of not just the 12½ million annual user days among sportsmen, but also the 12½ million parks users. It means keeping landowners who provide necessary habitat happy as well as sportsmen and tourists.

Balance can only be achieved with level heads. But this new twist has left me scratching mine, wondering aloud whether Sonnenberg might just have fallen off his rocker.

More in Sports

Big Sunday at the sold-out PC, where the Avalanche never trailed in a 5-1 victory over Detroit. Given the score and the circumstance, our game story is all about Nathan MacKinnon and his Hart Trophy candidacy.